Using a 'talk' model of shared decision making to propose an observation-based measure: Observer OPTION 5 Item

Shared Decision-Making in Physical Therapist Care for People With Shoulder Problems: An Observer-Based Analysis of Audio-Recorded Consultations

OBJECTIVE

Despite the substantial diagnostic and therapeutic uncertainties in the decision-making process, it remains largely unclear to what extent shared decision-making (SDM) is applied in physical therapist care for people with shoulder problems. The purpose of our study was to determine to what extent SDM is part of the decision-making process in initial physical therapist consultations of people with shoulder problems and to identify factors associated with the level of SDM.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, the level of SDM was measured by assessing audio-recorded initial physical therapist consultations of people with shoulder problems using the 5-item Observing Patient Involvement in SDM tool (OPTION-5; 0-100, higher OPTION scores indicate higher level of SDM). Associations between the level of SDM and the characteristics of patients, physical therapists, and consultations were assessed using multilevel analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 100 initial physical therapist consultations of 41 participating physical therapists were included. The mean OPTION-5 score was 27 (range = 5-70). On none of the individual items of the OPTION-5, the highest score "exemplar effort" was observed. The multilevel analysis showed that 3 determinants were associated with higher level of SDM: younger age of the patient (b = -1.8; 95% CI = -3.1 to -0.4), longer duration of the consultation (b = 5.5; 95% CI = 2.7 to 8.3), and higher level of education of the physical therapist (b = 9.1; 95% CI = 2.7 to 15.4).

CONCLUSIONS

The level of SDM in daily physical therapist practice for people with shoulder problems leaves room for improvement. Future research should focus on strategies to improve the application of SDM in physical therapist care for people with shoulder problems. The determinants such as duration of the consultation, and the level of education of the physical therapist might provide guidance in developing these strategies for improving the application of SDM.

IMPACT

The findings of this study give insight into the limited application of SDM in physical therapy for people with shoulder problems. Duration of the consultations and level of education of the physical therapist impact the level of SDM.

Systematic review of observational coding systems to assess patient-healthcare professional interactions

OBJECTIVES

Systematic coding is used to study interactions between patients and healthcare professionals from an independent observer perspective. Many coding systems are available, but an up-to-date overview is lacking. We aimed to: (1) provide a comprehensive overview of systems for systematic coding of patient-healthcare professional interactions; and describe their 2) general characteristics and development, and 3) validation and adaptation.

METHODS

We systematically searched peer-reviewed empirical articles in five databases (Cochrane, Embase, PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO) using variations of the following keywords: (i) patient and/or other stakeholder, (ii) healthcare professional (iii), interactions in healthcare, (iv) coding tool, and (v) development and/or validation. All titles/abstracts and full-texts were screened independently and in duplicate. Additionally, coding systems were identified through an earlier review, an open-access research database, and a forward-reference search of all included coding systems up to that point. For all eligible systems, we extracted characteristics and psychometric properties.

RESULTS

From a total of 6950 identified articles from literature databases, 188 full-text articles were screened. Thirty-five articles were included from additional sources. In total, we included 124 articles describing 98 coding systems. Systems were highly variable in terms of topic (e.g., patient-centered communication, shared decision making, behavior change counseling), clinical context (e.g., oncology, pediatrics, generic), rigor of development and reporting, coding complexity, and extent of psychometric testing. Inter-rater reliability was reported for most coding systems; only few were tested for other types of reliability or for validity.

CONCLUSIONS

A plethora of coding systems are available, but more systematic reporting and psychometric testing are urgently needed to enhance evidence of validity. Testing may initially focus on the most relevant and broadly applicable coding systems.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

These results can aid researchers in selecting the most suitable coding system for their purposes. Researchers may consider using or adapting existing systems, before developing new coding systems.

Feasibility of an Intervention to Support Shared Decision-Making for Critically Ill Infants

OBJECTIVE

To develop and pilot an intervention to support communication and decision-making for critically ill infants.

STUDY DESIGN

In this single-arm mixed-methods prospective feasibility study, we enrolled infants, parents, and clinicians at a single tertiary care center. The Building Rapport, Improving Dialogue, and Growing Empathy (BRIDGE) intervention contains a values clarification exercise and question prompt list that parents can opt to share with the health care team. Parent and clinician participants completed surveys and semi-structured interviews ≥ 72 hours post-intervention. The primary outcome was intervention feasibility, defined as enrollment rate ≥ 50% and complete data collection rate ≥ 80%. Secondary outcomes included intervention acceptability and preparation for decision-making (PrepDM, score: 0-100, higher scores indicating higher preparedness). Statistical analyses were descriptive and interviews were analyzed using a rapid-cycle qualitative approach.

RESULTS

30 clinicians and 44 parents of 30 infants were enrolled (enrollment rate: 56%; complete data collection rate: 97%). The majority of parents and clinicians endorsed the tool as helpful, would recommend the tool to other parents, and would use the tool in the future. Preparedness for decision-making was high for both mothers (median score = 82, IQR: 70.0 - 90.0) and fathers (score = 60, IQR: 38 - 74). Qualitative analysis of the intervention's impact identified 4 themes: 1) providing a scaffold, 2) validating and affirming experience, 3) preparing for a conversation, and 4) facilitating connection.

CONCLUSIONS

The BRIDGE intervention was feasible and acceptable to parents and clinicians. Future work should assess its impact on values-congruent decision-making, therapeutic alliance, and infant outcomes.

Facilitators and Barriers to Shared Decision-Making Communication Between Latina Mothers and Pediatric Mental Healthcare Providers

This study assessed communication factors influencing shared decision-making (SDM) between language-congruent clinicians and Latina mothers of pediatric mental health patients. The sample comprised Latinx youth up to 22 years old who were enrolled in mental healthcare and attended mental health-related sessions with their parent. One hundred transcripts depicting mental health visits were coded using the Conversation Analysis framework. Coding included inductive coding that came from analyzing the structure, or orderliness, of the visits and content discussed that affects SDM. Thematic qualitative analysis revealed that facilitators to SDM included collaborative engagement, parents being active in tailoring session content, and integrating the preferences, roles, and next steps for treatment among all participants. Barriers included unskilled interpersonal interactions undermining rapport, off-topic conversations becoming the session's focus, poor time management, and irregularly integrating parent/patient preferences into the clinician's decisions regarding the child's treatment. Additionally, visit content, structure, tone, and interpersonal engagement were factors that variably facilitated or served as barriers to patient participation in SDM and were integral to collaborative, family-centered care. These findings delineated characteristics of pediatric mental health conversations and identified areas to strengthen communication between parents, patients, and clinicians to shift toward more effective SDM and improve patient outcomes among Latinx families.

Shared Decision-Making (SDM) for Female SUI: Current Practice in Three Western Countries

INTRODUCTION

Different decision-making styles can be used to provide counselling for the multiple reasonable treatment options for patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Shared decision-making (SDM) is currently advocated as the preferred style for preference sensitive decisions, as SDM takes patient preferences into account. This study aimed to map the current decision-making process for SUI in three Western countries.

METHODS

We included 124 patients and 18 physicians in a multicentre, prospective study in five hospitals in Canada, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. We used patient and physician versions of the Control Preference Scale (CPS) questionnaires and examined audio-recordings of consultations with the OPTION-5 instrument to assess the degree of SDM.

RESULTS

Most patients (63%) perceived the decision-making as informative, some (29%) as shared and only a few (8%) as paternalistic. Dutch patients more often perceived the decision-making as informative than UK or Canadian patients. Patients' preferred and perceived decision-making styles matched in 70% of consultations. Patients' and physicians' perceptions of decision-making were the same in 60% of consultations, but their perceptions of SDM use did not match. This also did not match the OPTION-5 scores reflecting the use of SDM. Almost all patients were satisfied with the decision-making they perceived.

CONCLUSION

Most patients and physicians prefer and perceive the current decision-making process as informative decision-making. However, patients and physicians have different perceptions of their mutual consultation. This highlights the imprecise concept of SDM for both patients and physicians.

Language in Bioethics: Beyond the Representational View

Though assumptions about language underlie all bioethical work, the field has rarely partaken of theories of language. This article encourages a more linguistically engaged bioethics. We describe the tacit conception of language that is frequently upheld in bioethics-what we call the representational view, which sees language essentially as a means of description. We examine how this view has routed the field's theories and interventions down certain paths. We present an alternative model of language-the pragmatic view-and explore how it expands and clarifies traditional bioethical concerns. To lend concreteness, we apply the pragmatic view to a pervasive concept in bioethics and adjacent fields: decision making. We suggest that problems of the decision-making approach to bioethical issues are grounded in adherence to the representational view. Drawing on empirical work in surgery and critical care, we show how the pragmatic view productively reframes bioethical questions about how medical treatments are pursued.

Shared decision making in routine oncology appointments with Black patients with lung cancer

PURPOSE

Poor clinician-patient communication may contribute to racialized inequities in cancer symptom burden. Shared decision-making (SDM) enhances clinician-patient communication, and could contribute to health equity for Black patients with cancer. However, research on SDM is limited for Black patients with cancer.

METHODS

This multi-method longitudinal observational study examined SDM during routine oncology follow-ups for patients with advanced lung cancer. We analyzed SDM reported by clinicians (n = 6), self-identified Black patients with lung cancer (n = 30), and coded from patient visit recordings (n = 20). We described the symptom management conversations, and examined how SDM related to patient satisfaction and symptom severity with two-sided correlations.

RESULTS

Most patients (85.0%) asked questions during appointments and discussed cancer-related symptoms (95.0%), most commonly pain/neuropathy (65.0%). Though coded SDM during symptom discussions was low, providers and patients reported high levels of SDM. Coded SDM did not statistically significantly correlate with post-appointment satisfaction (r = -.01, p > .10) or symptom burden (r = .04, p > .10). However, patient-reported SDM did relate to post-appointment satisfaction (r = .72, p = .08) and symptom burden (r = .35, p = .08) one month later.

CONCLUSIONS

Through detailed multi-method analysis, we found that coded SDM did not correspond to patient and physician-reported SDM during routine oncology appointments. Patient-reported SDM correlated to several better physical and mental health outcomes as well as overall satisfaction a month later. Our findings highlight the complexities of clinician-patient communication and the importance of studying these processes for Black patients with cancer. Future research should develop culturally-relevant methods of assessing SDM with Black patients and understand Black patients' communication needs.

Shared Decision-Making in Patients with an Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm or Peripheral Artery Disease: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

This review provides an overview of the literature on shared decision-making (SDM) in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) or peripheral artery disease (PAD) and identifies barriers and facilitators.

METHODS

A systematic scoping review was conducted, in which 4 databases were systematically searched for the period January 2007 to November 2024. All articles were reviewed by 2 independent authors and asses for quality using the mixed-methods appraisal tool (MMAT).

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 15,738 articles, of which 50 met the inclusion criteria. Quality assessment via MMAT showed good quality in 70% of the studies. Various influencing factors were revealed on SDM in patients, physicians, consult content, and the system or organization of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increased attention, implementing SDM in AAA and PAD patients remains challenging due to healthcare professionals' limited understanding of SDM. Patients seek active involvement but often feel inadequately engaged. There is a notable lack of research focusing on health care professionals and systemic influences on SDM.

Mixed Comparative Evaluation of a Training Program Dedicated to Cystic Fibrosis Reference Centers: Protocol for the Pilot Implementation of Shared Decision-Making in the Treatment of Diabetes in Adult Patients With Cystic Fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Diabetes affects half of the patients with cystic fibrosis who are aged 30 years and older. Diabetes progresses asymptomatically over a long period of time. Two treatment options are possible: start insulin as soon as cystic fibrosis diagnosis is made with the additional constraints of cystic fibrosis or wait while monitoring the patient's clinical condition and start insulin when diabetes symptoms develop and therefore later. This situation is particularly well suited to shared decision-making (SDM) between the physician (health care team) and patient/relatives.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to perform qualitative and quantitative analyses for evaluating the outcomes and experience of SDM implementation between the physician/health care team trained for SDM and patients/their relatives for cystic fibrosis-related diabetes.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental with a comparison study will be developed. Three cystic fibrosis reference centers (CFRCs) will be trained in SDM by using a web-based training, including a validated decision aid and coaching for physicians and the medical team. Two control CFRCs will maintain their usual practices. A qualitative analysis through observation of consultations, individual semistructured interviews with patients, and focus groups in CFRCs will be conducted based on a thematic content analysis. Questionnaires related to decision-making and experience of decision-making with and without SDM implementation will be administered to patients and physicians.

RESULTS

Forty patients will be included (8 patients in each center), that is, 60 consultation observations (2 consultations per patient in the intervention groups given the modalities of the SDM process) will be conducted in 2025. Eight focus groups will be conducted in the 5 centers (2 groups in each intervention CFRC and 1 group in each control CFRC). This qualitative corpus plus responses to the patient and physician questionnaires will make it possible to know whether the practice of SDM in CFRCs is increased by an implementation strategy and to analyze the experience of patients and their relatives regarding decision-making modalities. Analysis of the outcomes and experience of the implementation of SDM are of importance to identify the facilitators and barriers to SDM from patients' and CFRCs' point of views.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study will give us keys to adapt, improve, and disseminate SDM more widely in the context of cystic fibrosis therapy. SDM could thus be used in routine clinical practice in CFRCs at the national level.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04891159; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04891159?id=NCT04891159.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/62931.

Visual decision aids to support communication and shared decision-making: How are they valued and used in practice?

BACKGROUND

It is unknown how visual decision aids support communication and shared decision-making in everyday clinical practice, and how they are perceived by patients with varying levels of health literacy and their healthcare providers. Recently, three visual decision aids have been developed for renal replacement treatment, osteoarthritis of the knee, and osteoarthritis of the hip. This study aims to explore how patients and healthcare providers use and value these visual decision aids.

METHODS

The evaluation of the visual decision aids was performed by coding video-recorded outpatient consultations (n = 35), by conducting reflective practice interviews with healthcare providers (n = 9), and through interviews with patients (n = 29). Consultations were coded using the 5-item OPTION instrument to measure shared decision-making, and self-developed items based on the visual decision aids and user guide.

RESULTS

Both healthcare providers and patients valued the use of the visual decision aids, especially the overview page with all treatment options. Accordingly, it was observed that most providers mainly used the overview page. However, providers in nephrology discussed the individual treatment pages more often than providers in osteoarthritis care. This study also showed that most providers were unfamiliar with the user guide for the visual decision aids.

CONCLUSION

Visual decision aids for nephrology and osteoarthritis care seem particularly useful for patients with limited health literacy. Healthcare providers in this study mainly used the overview page of the visual decision aids. Although this is valued by both providers and patients, it is also important to discuss the individual treatment pages, including the pros and cons, with patients. This study also points to differences between outpatient clinics or departments in the use and implementation of the visual decision aids. The visual decision aids for osteoarthritis are used to a limited extent. In nephrology clinics, the visual decision aid is implemented.

The American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable strategic plan: Current challenges and future directions for shared decision making for lung cancer screening

Shared decision making (SDM) between health care professionals and patients is essential to help patients make well informed choices about lung cancer screening (LCS). Patients who participate in SDM have greater LCS knowledge, reduced decisional conflict, and improved adherence to annual screening compared with patients who do not participate in SDM. SDM tools are acceptable to patients and clinicians. The importance of SDM in LCS is emphasized in recommendations from professional organizations and highlighted as a priority in the 2022 President's Cancer Panel Report. The updated 2022 national coverage determination from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services reaffirms the value of SDM in offering LCS to eligible beneficiaries. The Shared Decision-Making Task Group of the American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable undertook a group consensus process to identify priorities for research and implementation related to SDM for LCS and then evaluated current knowledge in these areas. Priority areas included: (1) developing feasible, adaptable SDM training programs for health care professionals; (2) understanding the impact of alternative health system LCS models on SDM practice and outcomes; (3) developing and evaluating new patient decision aids for use with diverse populations and in varied settings; (4) offering conceptual clarity about what constitutes a high-quality decision and developing appropriate quality measures; and (5) studying the use of prediction-augmented screening to support SDM in practice. Gaps in current research in all areas were observed. The authors conclude with a research and implementation agenda to advance the quality and implementation of SDM for persons who might benefit from LCS.

Have a vital end-user been overlooked? Developing a shared decision intervention for patients with potential pancreatic cancer regarding the choice of surgery

Objective

To develop a patient decision aid facilitating shared decision making for patients with potential pancreatic cancer deciding about no treatment, surgical or medical treatment.

Methods

Based on a user-centred design by Wittemann et al., we developed a shared decision making intervention in three phases: 1) Understanding decision needs 2) Development of a patient decision aid (PtDA) based on a generic template 3) Assessment of the intervention from interviews with patients (n = 11), relatives (n = 11), nurses (n = 4) and surgeons (n = 2) analysed with thematic analysis, and measuring patients' perceptions of choice of options with the Decisional Conflict Scale.

Results

Results showed varying experiences with the use of the PtDA, with surgeons not finding PtDA useful as it was impractical and constraining with patients' conversations. There was no difference in patients' perceptions in choosing options for those being presented vs those patients not being presented for the PtDA.

Conclusion

The format and structure of the PtDA was not feasible for the surgeons as fundamental users in the present clinic.

Innovation

This study highlights the urgent need to consider clinical context before introducing a predefined tool and shows the importance of a multistakeholder approach. Research should focus on finding means to successful implement shared decision making.

Shared decision making in primary malignant bone tumour surgery around the knee in children and young adults: protocol for a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Children and young adults needing surgery for a primary malignant bone tumour around the knee face a difficult, life-changing decision. A previous study showed that this population wants to be involved more in the decision-making process and that more involvement leads to less decisional stress and regret. Therefore, a well-designed and standardized decision-making process based on the principles of shared decision-making needs to be designed, implemented, and evaluated.

METHODS

We developed a shared decision-making (SDM) model for this patient population, including an online decision aid (DA). This model has been implemented in the standard care of patients with a primary malignant bone tumour around the knee. Following implementation, we will analyse its effect on the decision-making process and the impact on patient experiences using questionnaires and interviews. Moreover, potential areas for improvement will be identified.

DISCUSSION

Given the importance of involving patients and parents in surgical decision-making, particularly in life-changing surgery such as malignant bone tumour surgery, and given the lack of SDM models applicable for this purpose, we want to share our model with the international community, including our study protocol for evaluating and optimising the model. This study will generate valuable knowledge to facilitate the optimisation of current patient care for local treatment. The sharing of our implementation and study protocol can serve as an example for other centres interested in implementing SDM methods in an era characterized by more empowered patients and parents who desire autonomy and reliable and realistic information.

Refining, implementing, and evaluating an anesthesia choice conversation aid for older adults with hip fracture: protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Hip fracture surgery under general or spinal anesthesia is a common procedure for older adults in the United States (US). Although spinal or general anesthesia can be appropriate for many patients, and the choice between anesthesia types is preference-sensitive, shared decision-making is not consistently used by anesthesiologists counseling patients on anesthesia for this procedure. We designed an Option Grid™-style conversation aid, My Anesthesia Choice─Hip Fracture, to promote shared decision making in this interaction. This study will refine the aid and evaluate its implementation and effectiveness in clinical practice.

METHODS

The study will be conducted over 2 phases: qualitative interviews with relevant clinicians and patients to refine the aid, followed by a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial of the intervention at 6 settings in the US. Primary outcomes will include the percentage of eligible patients who receive the intervention (intervention reach) and the change in quality of patient/clinician communication (intervention effectiveness). Secondary outcomes addressing other RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) domains will also be collected. Outcomes will be compared between baseline data and an active implementation period and then compared between the active implementation period and a sustainment period. Implementation strategies are guided by three constructs from the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM): intervention, recipients, and implementation and sustainability infrastructure.

DISCUSSION

This is a novel, large-scale trial evaluating and implementing a shared decision-making conversation aid for anesthesia choices. Strong buy-in from site leads and expert advisors will support both the success of implementation and the future dissemination of results and the intervention. Results from this study will inform the broader implementation of this aid for patients with hip fractures and can lead to the development and implementation of similar conversation aids for other anesthesia choices.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06438640.

A Need for Targeted Teaching of Shared Decision-Making as Identified from an Assessment of Client-Centered Communication Skills Training with Companion Animal Veterinarians

Shared decision-making has been increasingly discussed as a communication practice within veterinary medicine, and it is gaining more traction for diagnostic and treatment planning conversations and specifically offering a spectrum of care. This teaching tip describes the data from an investigation of veterinarians' shared decision-making in a pre-test/post-test communication skills training intervention that used a client-centered, skills-based communication approach. Practice teams from a purposive sample of four companion animal veterinary clinics in Texas participated in a 15-month communication skills intervention, including interactive group workshops and one-on-one communication coaching. To assess the outcome of the intervention, for nine participating veterinarians, appointments recorded pre- (n = 85) and post-intervention (n =  85) were analyzed using the Observer OPTION 5 instrument to assess shared decision-making. The intervention effect was evaluated using mixed logistic regression, adjusting for appointment type. The communication intervention did not significantly impact participating veterinarians' demonstration of shared decision-making (pre = 25.42, n = 55; post = 28.03, n = 56; p = 0.36). Appointment type was significantly associated with veterinarians' OPTION 5 scores (p = .0004) and health problem appointments (OPTION 5 = 30.07) demonstrated greater shared decision-making than preventive care appointments (OPTION 5 = 22.81). Findings suggest that client-centered, skills-based training traditionally used in veterinary curricula and continuing education may not foster the use of shared decision-making, which is a higher-order communication approach that may require a dedicated process-oriented training. This teaching tip highlights the need for a targeted stepwise approach to teach shared decision-making.

Exploring the MAPPING application to facilitate risk communication and shared decision-making between physicians and patients with gynaecological cancer

This is an observational study in which we evaluated current levels of risk communication (RC) among gynaecological oncologists and their view on the Mapping All Patient Probabilities in Numerical Graphs (MAPPING) application as a possible tool to facilitate RC and shared decision-making (SDM). In part A, we audio-recorded 29 conversations between gynaecological oncologists and patients when discussing treatment options. In part B, interviews were performed with eight gynaecological oncologists.RC and SDM were measured using two observer-based measures, that is, the RC content (RCC) tool (scale 0-2) and the OPTION-5 instrument (scale 0-100). We used CollaboRATE questionnaire (scale 0-10) and a self-developed survey to assess patient-reported RC and SDM. In part B, we evaluated physicians' attitudes regarding the use of the MAPPING application to support RC. Patients were minimally involved in the decision-making process (OPTION-5 25.9%±13.4 RCC 0.21±0.18). Patient-reported SDM was high (mean collaboRATE score 9.19±1.79) and patients preferred receiving numeric information, whereas most physicians used qualitative risk terms rather than exact numbers. In part B, gynaecologists had a positive attitude towards the MAPPING application. However, they stated that the app was difficult to use improvement of layout and better implementations are needed.

Shared Decision-Making with Latinx Caregivers During Community Implemented Evidence-Based Practices: Determinants and Associations with Alliance

OBJECTIVE

The current observational study examined shared decision-making (SDM) with caregivers of Latinx youth within the delivery of multiple evidence-based practices (EBPs) in community mental health services. The aims of the study were to (1) Identify therapist and client factors associated with increased SDM within EBP sessions and (2) Examine the association between SDM and therapeutic alliance between community therapists and Latinx caregivers.

METHOD

The Observing Patient Involvement in Decision-Making (OPTION) instrument measured SDM in 210 audio-recorded therapy sessions with 62 community therapists (91.94% female; 69.35% Latinx) and 109 Latinx caregivers (91.43% female) of youth who were an average age of 8.26 years (SD = 3.59). We used the Therapy Process Observational Coding System for Child Psychotherapy-Alliance scale to measure the caregiver-therapist alliance observationally. Multilevel linear regressions were conducted to examine research questions.

RESULTS

Greater SDM was observed within sessions where therapists targeted conduct problems versus trauma (B = -8.79, 95% CI[-14.09, -3.49], p = .001). There was a trend that SDM was higher in English-language sessions compared to Spanish. We found that the global measurement of SDM (B = .04, 95% CI[.01, .08], p = .03) and the OPTION item Integrate Preferences (B = .69, 95% CI[.07, 1.32], p = .03) were positively associated with alliance.

CONCLUSIONS

SDM may help foster Latinx caregiver engagement within EBP delivery. Provider training in SDM may be warranted with consideration of the specific clinical contexts (e.g., by presenting problem) that are appropriate for collaborative treatment planning. More research is needed to further establish the benefits of SDM in youth psychotherapy.

What value structure underlies shared decision making? A qualitative synthesis of models of shared decision making

OBJECTIVE

To construct the underlying value structure of shared decision making (SDM) models.

METHOD

We included previously identified SDM models (n = 40) and 15 additional ones. Using a thematic analysis, we coded the data using Schwartz's value theory to define values in SDM and to investigate value relations.

RESULTS

We identified and defined eight values and developed three themes based on their relations: shared control, a safe and supportive environment, and decisions tailored to patients. We constructed a value structure based on the value relations and themes: the interplay of healthcare professionals' (HCPs) and patients' skills [Achievement], support for a patient [Benevolence], and a good relationship between HCP and patient [Security] all facilitate patients' autonomy [Self-Direction]. These values enable a more balanced relationship between HCP and patient and tailored decision making [Universalism].

CONCLUSION

SDM can be realized by an interplay of values. The values Benevolence and Security deserve more explicit attention, and may especially increase vulnerable patients' Self-Direction.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This value structure enables a comparison of values underlying SDM with those of specific populations, facilitating the incorporation of patients' values into treatment decision making. It may also inform the development of SDM measures, interventions, education programs, and HCPs when practicing.

Assessing the educational quality of shared decision-making interventions for residents: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Many studies on educational interventions to enhance residents' shared decision-making (SDM) skills show limited improvement in SDM skills and clinical outcomes. One plausible explanation for these suboptimal results is the insufficient emphasis on the educational quality of training interventions.

METHODS

This review evaluates interventions' educational quality using an evaluation framework based on a previous study on effective skills transfer and a well-known SDM model. A systematic review was conducted, searching three databases until December 13, 2022. We assessed study quality by calculating MERSQI scores, examined the levels of study effects based on Kirkpatrick's model, and applied our evaluation framework to assess the interventions' educational quality. Given the heterogeneity among the studies, a meta-analysis was not feasible.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included. Role-play and feedback were common training characteristics (65% and 54% of interventions). Only four studies (15%) met our framework's high educational quality threshold. No correlation was found between MERSQI scores and educational quality.

CONCLUSIONS

This review is a valuable attempt to assess the educational quality of SDM interventions beyond measuring study outcomes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Future evaluation frameworks should consider study results, training characteristics, and training content. Our framework offers a sound basis for such an evaluation framework.

Evaluation of the Implementation of the Dutch Breast Cancer Surveillance Decision Aid including Personalized Risk Estimates in the SHOUT-BC Study: A Mixed Methods Approach

BACKGROUND

To improve Shared decision-making (SDM) regarding personalized post-treatment surveillance, the Breast Cancer Surveillance Decision Aid (BCS-PtDA), integrating personalized risk information, was developed and implemented in eight hospitals. The aim of this mixed-methods study was to (1) assess the implementation and participation rates, (2) identify facilitators and barriers for use by health care professionals (HCPs), (3) quantify the observed level of SDM, and (4) evaluate risk communication and SDM application in consultations.

METHODS

Implementation and participation rates and patients' BCS-PtDA use were calculated using hospital registry data and BCS-PtDA log data. HCPs' perspective on facilitators and barriers were collected using the MIDI framework. Observed SDM levels in consultation transcripts were quantified using the OPTION-5 scale. Thematic analysis was performed to assess consultation content.

RESULTS

The average PtDA implementation and participation rates were, respectively, 26% and 61%. HCPs reported that the PtDA supported choice awareness. Reported barriers for implementation were mainly increased workload and a lack of perceived benefits. The consultation analysis (n = 64) showed patients were offered a choice, but deliberation was lacking. Risk communication was generally adequate.

DISCUSSION

When the BCS-PtDA was used, patients were clearly given a choice regarding their post-treatment surveillance, but information provision and SDM application can be improved.

Impact of timing and format of patient decision aids for breast cancer patients on their involvement in and preparedness for decision making - the IMPACTT randomised controlled trial protocol

BACKGROUND

After curative surgery for early-stage breast cancer, patients face a decision on whether to undergo surgery alone or to receive one or more adjuvant treatments, which may lower the risk of recurrence. Variations in survival outcomes are often marginal but there are differences in the side effects and other features of the options that patients may value differently. Hence, the patient's values and preferences are critical in determining what option to choose. It is well-researched that the use of shared decision making and patient decision aids can support this choice in a discussion between patient and clinician. However, it is still to be investigated what impact the timing and format of the patient decision aid have on shared decision making outcomes. In this trial, we aim to investigate the impact of a digital pre-consult compared to a paper-based in-consult patient decision aid on patients' involvement in shared decision making, decisional conflict and preparedness to make a decision.

METHODS

The study is a randomised controlled trial with 204 patients at two Danish oncology outpatient clinics. Eligible patients are newly diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer and offered adjuvant treatments after curative surgery to lower the risk of recurrence. Participants will be randomised to receive either an in-consult paper-based patient decision aid or a pre-consult digital patient decision aid. Data collection includes patient and clinician-reported outcomes as well as observer-reported shared decision making based on audio recordings of the consultation. The primary outcome is the extent to which patients are engaged in a shared decision making process reported by the patient. Secondary aims include the length of consultation, preparation for decision making, preferred role in shared decision making and decisional conflict.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first known randomised, controlled trial comparing a digital, pre-consult patient decision aid to an identical paper-based, in-consult patient decision aid. It will contribute evidence on the impact of patient decision aids in terms of investigating if pre-consult digital patient decisions aids compared to in-consult paper-based decision aids support the cancer patients in being better prepared for decision making.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05573022).

Sharing a medical decision

During the last decades, shared decision making (SDM) has become a very popular model for the physician-patient relationship. SDM can refer to a process (making a decision in a shared way) and a product (making a shared decision). In the literature, by far most attention is devoted to the process. In this paper, I investigate the product, wondering what is involved by a medical decision being shared. I argue that the degree to which a decision to implement a medical alternative is shared should be determined by taking into account six considerations: (i) how the physician and the patient rank that alternative, (ii) the individual preference scores the physician and the patient (would) assign to that alternative, (iii) the similarity of the preference scores, (iv) the similarity of the rankings, (v) the total concession size, and (vi) the similarity of the concession sizes. I explain why shared medical decisions are valuable, and sketch implications of the analysis for the physician-patient relationship.

Shared decision-making performance of general practice residents: an observational study combining observer, resident, and patient perspectives

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is considered fundamental to person-centred care. However, applying SDM may be a challenge for residents in general practice, since it is a complex competence that requires the integration of knowledge and skills from several competency domains.

OBJECTIVE

To support learning of SDM during medical residency, we aimed to gain insight in Dutch residents' observed and perceived SDM performance in general practice.

METHODS

We evaluated residents' SDM performance from an observer, resident, and patient perspective. Consultations of first- and third-year residents were recorded. Trained observers used the validated Observing Patient Involvement (OPTION5) scale to assess observed SDM performance of residents in 98 actual recorded consultations. Perceived SDM performance was evaluated by residents and patients completing validated SDM questionnaires, supplemented with questions about (the context of) the consultation and perceived relevance of SDM immediately after the consultation. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics (mean, SD, minimums, and maximums) and explorative bivariate analyses.

RESULTS

The residents' observed mean SDM performance was 19.1 (range, 0-100, SD = 10.9), mean resident self-reported SDM performance was 56.9 (range, 0-100, SD = 18.5), and mean patient-reported SDM performance was 73.3 (range, 0-100, SD = 26.8). We found a significant and positive correlation between observed SDM performance and residents' perceived relevance of SDM for the consultation (t = 4.571, P ≤ 0.001) and the duration of the consultation (r = 0.390, P ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that there is room for increasing awareness of the potential incongruence between observed and perceived SDM performance during medical residency, in order to facilitate the implementation of SDM in clinical practice.

Evaluating the implementation of personalised outcomes forecasts to optimise supervised exercise therapy in patients with intermittent claudication in the Netherlands: a multimethods study

BACKGROUND

To support the optimisation of supervised exercise therapy (SET) in patients with intermittent claudication, we developed personalised outcomes forecasts (POFs), which visualise estimated walking distance and quality of life for individual patients. The POFs may enable healthcare professionals, such as physical and exercise therapists, to improve shared decision-making and patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess differences in patient outcomes (functional walking distance, maximal walking distance and health-related quality of life) and the level of shared decision-making before and after the implementation of POFs in the conservative treatment of patients with intermittent claudication.

METHODS

An interrupted time series design was used to compare preimplementation and postimplementation differences on patient outcomes. Using routinely collected data, differences from baseline to 6 months were compared between patients before and patients after the implementation. To compare levels of shared decision-making, we conducted observations of initial consults within a sample of physical or exercise therapists both before and after the implementation. Audiorecords of observations were scored on shared decision-making using the OPTION-5 instrument.

RESULTS

Differences in improvements between patients with whom POFs were discussed (n=317) and patients before the implementation of POFs (n=721) did not reach statistical significance for both functional walking distance (experimental vs. control=+23%, p=0.11) and maximal walking distance (experimental vs. control=+21%, p=0.08). For health-related quality of life, the POFs-informed patients showed a statistically significant greater improvement of 4% (p=0.04). Increased levels of shared decision-making were observed in postimplementation consults (n=20) when compared with preimplementation consults (n=36), as the median OPTION-5 total score showed a statistically significant increase from 45 to 55 points (p=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Integrating POFs into daily practice of SET for patients with intermittent claudication could assist in improving health-related quality of life and enhancing patient involvement. Using POFs did not result in statistically significant different improvements between groups on walking distances.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NL8838.

Healthcare providers' use of dashboards with patient reported outcomes reinforces patients to fill out patient reported outcome measures

Background

Patient reported outcomes are used to assess the impact of medical interventions on perceived health in both clinical trials and daily care. Further, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) optimize the consultation. However, patient completion of PROMs before their consultation, and healthcare provider's (HCP) use of PROMs in their consultation are suboptimal. In this cross-sectional study, we examined whether viewing a PROM dashboard before or during consultation consecutively resulted in higher patient completion of PROMs.

Methods

As part of regular care, patients were asked to fill out PROMs prior their consultation. HCPs' dashboard views were logged. A chi-square test was performed on dashboard viewed (yes/no) with consecutively filling out PROMs (yes/no). The odds ratio (OR) of consecutively filling out PROMs after a dashboard view was calculated.

Results

38.016 consecutive appointments were linked to a previous appointment in which a dashboard could be viewed. In 2740 cases, a dashboard was viewed by the HCP, against 35.276 cases in which a dashboard was not viewed. Follow-up adherence in completing PROMs was 49%. The chi-square test showed statistical significance of p < .001. The OR of filling out a consecutive PROM when a dashboard was viewed was 3.16 (p < .001, 95% CI [2.9-3.5]).

Discussion

Patients are more likely to complete PROMs for their follow-up appointment when an HCP has viewed PROMs during or before consultation. HCPs should be aware of their responsibility in addressing PROMs, because using PROMs in consultation does not only have a positive effect on communication, but also on patient completion of PROMs.

A shared decision-making intervention for individuals living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who are considering the menu of pulmonary rehabilitation treatment options; a feasibility study

OBJECTIVES

Shared Decision Making (SDM) has potential to support Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) decision-making when patients are offered a menu of centre- and home-based options. This study sought to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a three-component PR SDM intervention for individuals with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and PR healthcare professionals.

METHODS

Participants were recruited from Dec 2021-Sep 2022. Healthcare professionals attended decision coaching training and used the consultation prompt during consultations. Individuals received the Patient Decision Aid (PtDA) at PR referral. Outcomes included recruitment capability, data completeness, intervention fidelity, and acceptability. Questionnaires assessed patient activation and decisional conflict pre and post-PR. Consultations were assessed using Observer OPTION-5. Optional interviews/focus groups were conducted.

RESULTS

13% of individuals [n = 31, 32% female, mean (SD) age 71.19 (7.50), median (IQR) MRC dyspnoea 3.50 (1.75)] and 100 % of healthcare professionals (n = 9, 78% female) were recruited. 28 (90.32%) of individuals completed all questionnaires. SDM was present in all consultations [standardised scores were mean (SD) = 36.97 (21.40)]. Six healthcare professionals and five individuals were interviewed. All felt consultations using the PtDA minimised healthcare professionals' bias of centre-based PR, increased individuals' self-awareness of their health, prompted consideration of how to improve it, and increased involvement in decision-making.

DISCUSSION

Results indicate the study processes and SDM intervention is feasible and acceptable and can be delivered with fidelity when integrated into the PR pathway.

Shared decision-making between paediatric haematologists, children with sickle cell disease and their parents: an exploratory study

Children with sickle cell disease (SCD) face various healthcare choices to be made during the disease process that may impact their lives. Shared decision-making (SDM) could improve their health outcomes. We assessed if, and to what extent, paediatricians engage children with SCD and/or their parents in the decision-making process. In this observational cross-sectional study, paediatric SCD patients and their parents visiting the outpatient paediatrics clinic of a university hospital participated in a SDM baseline measurement. Two evaluators independently and objectively analysed the level of patient involvement in decision-making from the audio-recordings of the consultations using the OPTION-5 instrument, a 0-20-point scale from which scores are usually expressed as a percentage of ideal SDM. The level of SDM, as perceived by patients, parents and paediatricians, was appreciated using the SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc questionnaires, respectively. Scores could range from 0% (no SDM) to 100% (exemplary SDM). Twenty-four consultations in which a decision needed to be made about SCD treatment were audiotaped and analysed; six were from each paediatrician. The group consisted of 17 male and 7 female patients from various cultural backgrounds between 2 and 17 years old, with a mean age of 9.4 years (SD 4.2). Median OPTION-5 scores were 25.0% [IQR] 20.0-40.0%; range 0-55%). Median SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc scores were 56.7% (IQR 39.4-88.9%) and 68.9% (IQR 57.8-77.8%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although subjective scores of SDM were fair, the objectively scored level of SDM among children suffering from SCD leaves room for improvement. This may be realized by increasing knowledge about the benefits of SDM, child-centred SDM interventions and SDM-training for paediatricians that takes into account the complexity of intercultural challenges and risk communication between stakeholders.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Children that suffer from sickle cell disease (SCD) are more vulnerable to factors that negatively impact the care that they receive as well as suboptimal health outcomes. • Shared decision-making (SDM) can help children participate in a collaborative decision-making process about their preferred treatment options and improve their health outcomes.

WHAT IS NEW

• The level of participation in the decision-making process for patients suffering from SCD and the families that they belong to leaves room for improvement. The impact of intercultural challenges and the quality and consistency of risk-communication between stakeholders in paediatric SDM needs further exploration. • Paediatricians are more confident about their ability to involve the child and parents compared to how children and their parents experience their level of involvement in a shared decision-making process.

Shared decision-making improving efficacy in diarrhoea-dominant irritable bowel syndrome in Chinese outpatient setting: protocol of a prospective, randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Diarrhoea-dominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D) is a disorder with multiple pathogenesis; many people with IBS-D may have psychosocial issues which can make assessment and treatment more difficult. Routine treatment procedure might not always achieve the desired outcome. Therefore, patients may not be satisfied with the conventional experience and would like to be more involved in clinical decision-making. A shared decision-making (SDM) model, that requires patient participation, has been demonstrated to have a powerful effect on the diagnosis and treatment of other diseases, which improves patients' compliance, satisfaction, thus refining the clinical outcome. However, there is no corresponding evidence in IBS-D. Herein, we hope to verify the effect of SDM through clinical studies, and we anticipate that SDM can improve the therapeutic effect in patients with IBS-D.

METHODS

The study is a prospective, randomised, single-centre trial. 166 IBS-D outpatients who attend Peking Union Medical College Hospital will be allocated into routine treatment group and SDM group. The primary endpoint is the severity of bowel symptoms, measured by the IBS symptom severity scale. Secondary endpoints include impact of disease and quality of life, negative psychology and the evaluation of diagnosis and treatment process.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been obtained from the research ethics committee of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (I-23PJ470). This protocol has been approved by Chinese Clinical Trial Register (ChiCTR2300073681) in July 2023. The results of this trial will be published in an open-access way and disseminated among gastrointestinal physicians.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Chinese Clinical Trial Register (ChiCTR2300073681).

The patient's first point of contact (PINPOINT) - protocol of a prospective multicenter study of communication and decision-making during patient assessments by primary care registered nurses

BACKGROUND

A major challenge for primary care is to set priorities and balance demands with available resources. The registered nurses in this study are practice nurses working in primary care offices, playing a large role in initial assessments. The overall objective of this research is to investigate practices of communication and decision-making during nurses' initial assessment of patients' health problems in primary care, examine working mechanisms in good practices and develop feasible solutions.

METHODS

Project PINPOINT aims for a prospective multicenter study using various methods for data collection and analysis. A purposive sample of 150 patient‒nurse consultations, including 30 nurses and 150 patients, will be recruited at primary care centers in three different geographic areas of southwest Sweden. The study will report on outcomes of communication practices in relation to patient-reported expectations and experiences, communication processes and patient involvement, assessment and decision-making, related priorities and value conflicts with data from patient questionnaires, audio-recorded real-time communication, and reflective interviews with nurses.

DISCUSSION

This research will contribute to the knowledge needed for the guidance of first-line decision-making processes to best meet patient and public health needs. This knowledge is necessary for the development of assessments and decisions to be better aligned to patients and to set priorities. Insights from this research can empower patients and service providers and help understand and enhance feasible person-centered communication strategies tailored to patients' level of health literacy. More specifically, this research will contribute to knowledge that can strengthen nurses' communication, assessments, and clinical decision-making in primary care. In the long term, this will contribute to how the competencies of practice nurses and other professionals are organized and carried out to make the best use of the resources within primary care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06067672.

Information provision and decision-making in the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm: A qualitative study of patient experience

INTRODUCTION

Shared decision making (SDM) refers to patients and health care professionals working together to reach a decision about treatment/care. In abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) treatment options are influenced by patients' clinical characteristics, their preferences, and potential trade-offs between alternative interventions. This is a prime example of where SDM is essential to ensure the right decision is made for the right patient, yet we have little understanding of what happens in practice. This study explored patient experiences to understand SDM practice in AAA surgery.

METHODS

We used a qualitative approach to describe, and identify improvements to, current treatment decision making in abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery. Two groups of patients were interviewed: those at the point of discussing treatment options (with corresponding digitally recorded consultation data) and following surgical intervention from one hospital. Framework analysis was used.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were interviewed, seven at the point of discussing treatment options and eight following surgical intervention. Timing, format and sources of information, verbal framing of interventions and level of patient engagement were key themes. Four areas for improvement were identified: earlier provision and more detailed written information along with signposting to quality on-line information; both intervention options, risks, benefits, and consequences, were not always discussed; some clinicians were somewhat directive in the decision-making process; and patients' treatment values/preferences were not explored-the only example was in one of the eight recorded consultations. Patients could feel overwhelmed by the information and decision and fearful of the impending surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

More emphasis should be placed on the provision of full information and the exploration of patient values and preferences for treatment. Clinician training and support for patients, including decision aids, could facilitate the decision-making process. Providing written information earlier and guidance on reliable on-line resources would benefits patients and their families.

Shared decision making between community therapists and Latinx caregivers during evidence-based practice delivery in publicly-funded children's mental health services

OBJECTIVES

This observational study examined shared decision-making (SDM) with caregivers of Latinx youth within the delivery of multiple evidence-based practices (EBPs) in community mental health services. Study aims were to (1) Characterize therapist use of SDM strategies and (2) Describe the types of treatment decisions that were the focus of therapist use of SDM.

METHODS

The OPTION instrument was used to measure SDM in 210 audio-recorded therapy sessions with 62 community therapists and 109 Latinx caregivers; frequency and mean ratings of OPTION items were examined. Qualitative analysis on the descriptions of treatment decisions being deliberated was also conducted.

RESULTS

Results revealed that therapists used at least one SDM step in most sessions (N = 192; 91.43%) with a mean composite score of 32.78 (SD=17.79; range: 6.25-81.25). Four superordinate categories of decisions were: (1) Treatment planning, (2) Evidence-based Parenting Strategies, (3) Addressing Youth Functioning, and (4) Addressing Family Psychosocial Needs.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that community therapists serving Latinx families are naturalistically engaging in SDM steps about a variety of decisions during most EBP sessions, but only at modest levels.

Nationwide implementation of personalized outcomes forecasts to support physical therapists in treating patients with intermittent claudication: Protocol for an interrupted time series study

INTRODUCTION

Shared decision-making is the cornerstone of patient-centered care. However, evidence suggests that the application of shared decision-making in physical therapy practice is limited. To elicit shared decision-making and thereby potentially improve patient outcomes for patients with intermittent claudication, we developed a decision support system. This decision support system provides personalized outcomes forecasts that visualize the estimated walking distance of an individual patient. We hypothesize that personalized outcomes forecasts can support physical therapists in personalizing care to the needs and priorities of the individual patient to improve therapy outcomes.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The primary aim is to evaluate the impact of personalized outcomes forecasts for patients with intermittent claudication to optimize personalized treatment. Second, this study aims to evaluate the process of implementation.

METHODS

This study uses a prospective interrupted time series (ITS) design. Participating physical therapists are divided into four clusters. Every month of the study period, a new cluster will be invited to begin using the decision support system. We aim to include data of 11,250 newly referred patients for physical therapy treatment. All therapists associated with a network of specialized therapists (Chronic CareNet) and patients treated by these therapists are eligible to participate. The decision support system, called the KomPas, makes use of personalized outcomes forecasts, which visualize the estimated outcome of supervised exercise therapy for an individual patient with intermittent claudication. Personalized outcomes forecasts are developed using a neighbors-based approach that selects patients similar to the index patient (a.k.a. neighbors) from a large database. Outcomes to evaluate impact of implementation are patients' functional and maximal walking distance, quality of life and shared decision-making. Process evaluation will be measured in terms of utilization efficacy, including the outcomes dropout rate and reasons to (not) use the personalized outcomes forecasts. Data will be routinely collected through two online systems: the Chronic CareNet Quality system, and the website logs of the decision support system. Additionally, observations and semi-structured interviews will be conducted with a small subset of therapists.

ETHICS

Formal medical ethical approval by the Medical Research Ethics Committees United 'MEC-U' was not required for this study under Dutch law (reference number 2020-6250).

Shared Decision Making and the Management of Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Scoping Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to summarise the current knowledge of shared decision making (SDM) in patients facing a treatment decision about an intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), and to identify where further evidence is needed.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched on 18 July 2021. An updated search was run on 31 May 2022 for relevant studies published from 1 January 2000 to 31 May 2022.

REVIEW METHODS

This scoping review was undertaken in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines following a pre-defined protocol, retrieving studies reporting on aspects of SDM in those with intact AAAs. Qualitative synthesis of the articles was performed, and the results grouped according to theme.

RESULTS

Fifteen articles reporting on a total of 1 344 participants (age range 62-74 years) from hospital vascular surgery clinics with intact AAAs were included. Studies were observational (n = 9), non-randomised studies of an intervention (n = 3), and randomised clinical trials (n = 3). The first theme was the preferences and practice of SDM. The proportion of patients preferring SDM ranged from 58% to 95% (three studies), although objective rating of SDM practice was consistently < 50% (three studies). Clinician training improved SDM practice. The second theme was poor provision of information. Fewer than half of patients (0 - 46%) surveyed were informed about all available treatment options (three studies). Publicly available information sources were rated as poor. The third theme concerned the utility of decision making support tools (DSTs). Two randomised trials demonstrated that the provision of DSTs improves patient knowledge and agreement between patient preference and repair type received but not objective measures of SDM for patients with AAAs.

CONCLUSION

SDM for patients with an intact AAA appears to be in its infancy. Most patients with an AAA want SDM, but this is not commonly applied. Most patients with an AAA do not receive adequate information for SDM, although the use of bespoke DSTs leaves patients better informed to facilitate SDM.

Systematic review of shared decision-making interventions for people living with chronic respiratory diseases

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision-making (SDM) supports patients to make informed and value-based decisions about their care. We are developing an intervention to enable healthcare professionals to support patients' pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) decision-making. To identify intervention components we needed to evaluate others carried out in chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs). We aimed to evaluate the impact of SDM interventions on patient decision-making (primary outcome) and downstream health-related outcomes (secondary outcome).

DESIGN

We conducted a systematic review using the risk of bias (Cochrane ROB2, ROBINS-I) and certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) tools.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCHINFO, CINAHL, PEDRO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal, ClinicalTrials.gov, PROSPERO, ISRCTN were search through to 11th April 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Trials evaluating SDM interventions in patients living with CRD using quantitative or mixed methods were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data, assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence. A narrative synthesis, with reference to The Making Informed Decisions Individually and Together (MIND-IT) model, was undertaken.

RESULTS

Eight studies (n=1596 (of 17 466 citations identified)) fulfilled the inclusion criteria.Five studies included components targeting the patient, healthcare professionals and consultation process (demonstrating adherence to the MIND-IT model). All studies reported their interventions improved patient decision-making and health-related outcomes. No outcome was reported consistently across studies. Four studies had high risk of bias, three had low quality of evidence. Intervention fidelity was reported in two studies.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest developing an SDM intervention including a patient decision aid, healthcare professional training, and a consultation prompt could support patient PR decisions, and health-related outcomes. Using a complex intervention development and evaluation research framework will likely lead to more robust research, and a greater understanding of service needs when integrating the intervention within practice.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020169897.

Development and implementation of a decision aid for post-mastectomy breast reconstruction for Japanese women with breast cancer: a field-testing study

INTRODUCTION

Surgical options for post-mastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) have increased and become more diverse. These options may cause difficulty and stress for patients in making the best choice, and this also increases the likelihood of postoperative regret over a particular decision. To solve this issue, implementation of shared decision-making (SDM) using a decision aid (DA) has become of increasing interest. We have created the first prototype DA in Japan. The aim of the current field study was to assess the usability of this DA in promoting effective SDM and avoiding regret over a decision to undergo reconstructive surgery.

METHODS

A total of 25 consecutive patients who underwent BR were enrolled in the study, including 13 with SDM using the decision aid (DA + group) and 12 who received standard information (DA- group) before their choice of surgery. The Decision Regret Scale (DRS) were completed after PMBR, whereas SDM Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) was completed before PMBR. Descriptive and summary statistics were compared to identify differences between the two groups to assess the usability of the DA.

RESULTS

The DA + group had significantly higher mean total scores on the SDM-Q-9 (90.2 ± 5.3 vs. 84.1 ± 3.5, P = 0.0034) and DRS (90.3 ± 3.8 vs. 84.3 ± 6.7, P = 0.023), compared to those in the DA- group.

CONCLUSION

Use of the DA may cause patients to have a higher level of perceived SDM and less regret, which suggests that the DA helps to facilitate smooth and effective implementation of SDM. We conclude that this type of decision-making approach should be recommended for choice of surgery for PMBR.

Patient-guided dose reduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in chronic myeloid leukaemia (RODEO study): study protocol for a prospective, multicentre, single-arm trial

BACKGROUND

Dose reduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) with an optimal response to TKIs may support cost-effective medication use by maintaining therapeutic effectiveness while reducing adverse events and medication costs. As the choice for dose reduction depends on patients' individual needs and preferences, a patient-centred approach is warranted. Therefore, a study to evaluate the effectiveness of patient-guided dose reduction in patients with CML who are in a major or deep molecular response is designed.

METHODS

This study is a prospective, multicentre, single-arm study. 147 patients with CML (aged ≥ 18 years) in chronic phase, who are treated with imatinib, bosutinib, dasatinib, nilotinib or ponatinib, and have reached at least major molecular response (defined as having BCR-ABL levels < 0.1% for an uninterrupted period of 6 months) are eligible. Patients will use an online patient decision aid and a shared decision making consultation will be held, after which patients who choose to will receive a personalised, lower TKI dose. Primary outcome is the proportion of patients with intervention failure at 12 months after dose reduction, defined as patients who have restarted their initial dose due to (expected) loss of major molecular response. For this, BCR-ABL1 levels will be analysed from blood samples drawn at baseline, 6 weeks after dose reduction and 3-monthly thereafter. Secondary outcomes include the proportion of patients with intervention failure at 6 and 18 months after dose reduction. Other outcomes include differences before and after dose reduction regarding the number and severity of patient-reported side effects; quality of life; beliefs about medicines; and medication adherence. Patients' level of decisional conflict and regret after choosing dose reduction will be assessed, as will the decisional process experienced by patients and healthcare providers.

DISCUSSION

Outcomes of this trial using a personalised approach will provide clinical and patient-reported data to guide future dose reduction of TKIs in CML. If the strategy appears to be effective, it may be implemented as another valid option to offer next to standard of care to prevent potential unnecessary exposure to higher TKI doses in this selected group of patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT number 2021-006581-20.

Effects of a shared decision making intervention for older adults with multiple chronic conditions: the DICO study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effects of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs).

METHODS

A pragmatic trial evaluated the effects of the SDM^MCC intervention, existing of SDM training for nine geriatricians in two hospitals and a preparatory tool for patients. A prospective pre-intervention post-intervention multi-center clinical study was conducted in which an usual care group of older patients with MCC and their informal caregivers was included before the implementation of the intervention and a new cohort of patients and informal caregivers after the implementation of the intervention. SDM was observed using the OPTION^MCC during video-recorded consultations. Patient- and caregivers reported outcomes regarding their role in SDM, involvement, perceived SDM and decisional conflict were measured. The differences between groups regarding the level of observed SDM (OPTION^MCC) were analyzed with a mixed model analysis. Dichotomous patient-reported outcomes were analyzed with a logistic mixed model.

RESULTS

From two outpatient geriatric clinics 216 patients with MCCs participated. The mean age was 77.3 years, and 56.3% of patients were female. No significant difference was found in the overall level of SDM as measured with the OPTION^MCC or in patient-reported outcomes. However, at item level the items discussing 'goals', 'options', and 'decision making' significantly improved after the intervention. The items discussing 'partnership' and 'evaluating the decision-making process' showed a significant decrease. Fifty-two percent of the patients completed the preparatory tool, but the results were only discussed in 12% of the consultations.

CONCLUSION

This study provides scope for improvement of SDM in geriatrics. Engaging older adults with MCCs and informal caregivers in the decision making process should be an essential part of SDM training for geriatricians, beyond the SDM steps of explaining options, benefits and harms. More attention should be paid to the integration of preparatory work in the consultation.

Patient similarity and other artificial intelligence machine learning algorithms in clinical decision aid for shared decision-making in the Prevention of Cardiovascular Toxicity (PACT): a feasibility trial design

BACKGROUND

The many improvements in cancer therapies have led to an increased number of survivors, which comes with a greater risk of consequent/subsequent cardiovascular disease. Identifying effective management strategies that can mitigate this risk of cardiovascular complications is vital. Therefore, developing computer-driven and personalized clinical decision aid interventions that can provide early detection of patients at risk, stratify that risk, and recommend specific cardio-oncology management guidelines and expert consensus recommendations is critically important.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of the use of an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered clinical decision aid tool in shared decision making between the cancer survivor patient and the cardiologist regarding prevention of cardiovascular disease.

DESIGN

This is a single-center, double-arm, open-label, randomized interventional feasibility study. Our cardio-oncology cohort of > 4000 individuals from our Clinical Research Data Warehouse will be queried to identify at least 200 adult cancer survivors who meet the eligibility criteria. Study participants will be randomized into either the Clinical Decision Aid Group (where patients will use the clinical decision aid in addition to current practice) or the Control Group (current practice). The primary endpoint of this study is to assess for each patient encounter whether cardiovascular medications and imaging pursued were consistent with current medical society recommendations. Additionally, the perceptions of using the clinical decision tool will be evaluated based on patient and physician feedback through surveys and focus groups. This trial will determine whether a clinical decision aid tool improves cancer survivors' medication use and imaging surveillance recommendations aligned with current medical guidelines.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.Gov Identifier: NCT05377320.

Veterinarians' use of shared decision making during on-farm interactions with dairy and beef producers

BACKGROUND

The objectives of this study were to explore the level of shared decision making (SDM) between veterinarians and dairy and beef producers during on-farm interactions and to identify factors associated with veterinarians' use of SDM behaviours.

METHODS

A cross-sectional sample of food-animal veterinarians and their clients were recruited in Ontario, Canada. Their on-farm interactions were audio-video recorded. The recordings were analysed using the 'Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making' (observer OPTION5 ) instrument to determine the level of SDM utilised during preference-sensitive decisions. A logistic regression model was developed to assess factors associated with a preference-sensitive decision occurring. Meanwhile, a linear regression model was developed to identify factors associated with the level of SDM used.

RESULTS

Forty-one veterinarians participated, and 186 unique veterinarian-producer interactions were audio-video recorded and OPTION5 score was calculated. SDM scores were low and comparable to other studies using the OPTION5 instrument. The only factor associated with whether a preference-sensitive decision occurred was the length of the veterinarian and producer's relationship (in years). As the length of their relationship increased, a preference-sensitive decision was less likely to occur. The use of SDM behaviours was found to decrease as veterinarian burnout score increased. These findings demonstrate that SDM behaviours are being used by food-animal veterinarians, yet an opportunity exists to further implement more producer-centred SDM skills into on-farm interactions.

LIMITATIONS

Small portions of veterinarian-producer conversation occurred outside of audio-video-recorded interactions and were not included in the analysis.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study aid in further understanding on-farm interactions between veterinarians and producers and can help to further improve veterinary communication curricula.

For which decisions is Shared Decision Making considered appropriate? - A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To identify decision characteristics for which SDM authors deem SDM appropriate or not, and what arguments are used.

METHODS

We applied two search strategies: we included SDM models from an earlier review (strategy 1) and conducted a new search in eight databases to include papers other than describing an SDM model, such as original research, opinion papers and reviews (strategy 2).

RESULTS

From the 92 included papers, we identified 18 decision characteristics for which authors deemed SDM appropriate, including preference-sensitive, equipoise and decisions where patient commitment is needed in implementing the decision. SDM authors indicated limits to SDM, especially when there are immediate life-saving measures needed. We identified four decision characteristics on which authors of different papers disagreed on whether or not SDM is appropriate.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this review show the broad range of decision characteristics for which authors deem SDM appropriate, the ambiguity of some, and potential limits of SDM.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The findings can stimulate clinicians to (re)consider pursuing SDM in situations in which they did not before. Additionally, it can inform SDM campaigns and educational programs as it shows for which decision situations SDM might be more or less challenging to practice.

Shared decision making: A novel approach to personalized treatment in obstructive sleep apnea

Study objectives

i) To describe a novel approach of phenotyping by shared decision making (SDM) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) discharge consultations ii) to describe correlation between patient and observer based evaluations of SDM and iii) to describe treatment adherence.

Methods

Consecutive patients referred to the otorhinolaryngology department at Akershus University Hospital with suspected OSA between 2015 and 2016 participated. Patients with body mass index >30 were oversampled. Four male communication-trained doctors aged from 30 to 60 years participated. SDM was evaluated by modified content analysis and by the CollaboRATE self-report questionnaire and the "Observer OPTION (Young et al., 2008) [5]" rating scale. Positive airway pressure (PAP) treatment adherence and weight reduction was assessed by interview at six year follow-up.

Results

Eighteen consultations were video filmed. The content analysis revealed that the patient perspectives only briefly were explored. PAP was chosen by 17 of 18 patients. Median CollaboRATE questionnaire score was 29 (26, 30). Mean OPTION (Young et al., 2008) [5] score was 65.6 (SD 6.6, range 55-80). The correlation between SDM assessed by CollaboRATE self-report and by the "Observer OPTION (Young et al., 2008) [5]" rating scale was low (Pearson's r = 0.09). At follow up, 11 patients (64.7%) were PAP adherent and no one achieved 10% weight loss.

Conclusions

Despite a high degree of SDM compared to studies of non-OSA populations, the sub-optimal exploration of the patient perspective by communication-trained doctors precluded identification of patients willing to cope actively. SDM assessed by self-report and by a rating scale may represent two different constructs. PAP adherence was good.

Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions

BACKGROUND

One person in every four will suffer from a diagnosable mental health condition during their life. Such conditions can have a devastating impact on the lives of the individual and their family, as well as society.  International healthcare policy makers have increasingly advocated and enshrined partnership models of mental health care. Shared decision-making (SDM) is one such partnership approach. Shared decision-making is a form of service user-provider communication where both parties are acknowledged to bring expertise to the process and work in partnership to make a decision.  This review assesses whether SDM interventions improve a range of outcomes. This is the first update of this Cochrane Review, first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of SDM interventions for people of all ages with mental health conditions, directed at people with mental health conditions, carers, or healthcare professionals, on a range of outcomes including: clinical outcomes, participation/involvement in decision-making process (observations on the process of SDM; user-reported, SDM-specific outcomes of encounters), recovery, satisfaction, knowledge, treatment/medication continuation, health service outcomes, and adverse outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran searches in January 2020 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO (2009 to January 2020). We also searched trial registers and the bibliographies of relevant papers, and contacted authors of included studies.  We updated the searches in February 2022. When we identified studies as potentially relevant, we labelled these as studies awaiting classification.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-randomised controlled trials, of SDM interventions in people with mental health conditions (by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review included 13 new studies, for a total of 15 RCTs. Most participants were adults with severe mental illnesses such as schizophrenia, depression, and bipolar disorder, in higher-income countries. None of the studies included children or adolescents.  Primary outcomes We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve clinical outcomes, such as psychiatric symptoms, depression, anxiety, and readmission, compared with control due to very low-certainty evidence. For readmission, we conducted subgroup analysis between studies that used usual care and those that used cognitive training in the control group. There were no subgroup differences. Regarding participation (by the person with the mental health condition) or level of involvement in the decision-making process, we are uncertain if SDM interventions improve observations on the process of SDM compared with no intervention due to very low-certainty evidence. On the other hand, SDM interventions may improve SDM-specific user-reported outcomes from encounters immediately after intervention compared with no intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.01; 3 studies, 534 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, there was insufficient evidence for sustained participation or involvement in the decision-making processes. Secondary outcomes We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve recovery compared with no intervention due to very low-certainty evidence. We are uncertain if SDM interventions improve users' overall satisfaction. However, one study (241 participants) showed that SDM interventions probably improve some aspects of users' satisfaction with received information compared with no intervention: information given was rated as helpful (risk ratio (RR) 1.33, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.65); participants expressed a strong desire to receive information this way for other treatment decisions (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.68); and strongly recommended the information be shared with others in this way (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.58). The evidence was of moderate certainty for these outcomes. However, this same study reported there may be little or no effect on amount or clarity of information, while another small study reported there may be little or no change in carer satisfaction with the SDM intervention. The effects of healthcare professional satisfaction were mixed: SDM interventions may have little or no effect on healthcare professional satisfaction when measured continuously, but probably improve healthcare professional satisfaction when assessed categorically. We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve knowledge, treatment continuation assessed through clinic visits, medication continuation, carer participation, and the relationship between users and healthcare professionals because of very low-certainty evidence. Regarding length of consultation, SDM interventions probably have little or no effect compared with no intervention (SDM 0.09, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.41; 2 studies, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). On the other hand, we are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve length of hospital stay due to very low-certainty evidence. There were no adverse effects on health outcomes and no other adverse events reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review update suggests that people exposed to SDM interventions may perceive greater levels of involvement immediately after an encounter compared with those in control groups. Moreover, SDM interventions probably have little or no effect on the length of consultations.  Overall we found that most evidence was of low or very low certainty, meaning there is a generally low level of certainty about the effects of SDM interventions based on the studies assembled thus far. There is a need for further research in this area.

Rethinking Decision Quality: Measures, Meaning, and Bioethics

Studies of patient decision-making use many different measures to evaluate the quality of decisions and the decision-making process, partly to determine whether the ethical goals of informed consent, patient autonomy, and shared decision-making have been achieved. We describe these measures, grouped under three main approaches, and review their limitations, leading to three conclusions. First, no measure or combination of measures can provide a complete assessment of decision quality. Second, the quality of a decision is best characterized vaguely, for instance as "good," "satisfactory," or "poor," and these categorizations depend on qualitative judgments that go beyond quantitative measures. Third, bioethicists should focus on identifying and addressing poor or problematic decisions, rather than trying to incrementally increase decision quality, quantified by a measure. Decision-quality measures can be useful in research and in advancing important goals of bioethics, as long as the challenges of defining and measuring decision quality are recognized.

Determining the Development Strategy and Suited Adoption Paths for the Core Competence of Shared Decision-Making Tasks through the SAA-NRM Approach

Shared decision making (SDM) is an interactive process that involves patients and their healthcare professionals reaching joint decisions about medical care through negotiation. As the initiators of medical decision-making in daily routine, physicians should be aware of and concerned about the SDM process. Thus, professional competency development for SDM has become increasingly critical for physicians' training. Therefore, this study investigates the professional competency and the important competency development aspects/criteria of SDM tasks through expert interviews and literature research. The study adopts the SAA (satisfaction-attention analysis) method to assess the status of competency development aspects/criteria and determine the NRM (network relation map) based on the DEMATEL (decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory) technique. The results demonstrate that the CE (concept and evaluation) aspect is the dominant aspect, and the CR (communication and relationship) aspect is the aspect being dominated. The CE aspect influences the aspects of SP (skill and practice), JM (joint information and decision making) and CR, and the SP aspect affects the aspects of JM and CR. Then, the JM aspect affects the CR aspect. The study also suggests suitable adoption paths of competency development for SDM tasks using the NRM approach. It provides recommendations and strategic directions for SDM competency development and sustainable training programs.

Veterinary technicians contribute to shared decision-making during companion animal veterinary appointments

OBJECTIVE

To describe and compare veterinary professionals' use of shared decision-making during companion animal appointments.

DESIGN

Multi-practice cross-sectional study.

SAMPLE

A purposive sample of 4 companion animal veterinary clinics in a group practice in Texas.

PROCEDURES

A convenience sample of veterinary appointments were recorded January to March 2018 and audio-recordings were analyzed using the Observer OPTION5 instrument to assess shared decision-making. Each decision was categorized by veterinary professional involvement.

RESULTS

A total of 76/85 (89%) appointments included at least 1 decision between the client and veterinary professional(s), with a total of 129 shared decisions. Decisions that involved both a veterinary technician and veterinarian scored significantly higher for elements of shared decision-making (OPTION5 = 29.5 ± 8.4; n = 46), than veterinarian-only decisions (OPTION5 = 25.4 ± 11.50; P = .040; n = 63), and veterinary technician-only decisions (OPTION5 = 22.5 ± 7.15; P = .001; n = 20). Specific elements of shared decision-making that differed significantly based on veterinary professional involvement included educating the client about options (OPTION5 Item 3; P = .0041) and integrating the client's preference (OPTION5 Item 5; P = .0010).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Findings suggest that clients are more involved in decision making related to their pet's health care when both the veterinary technician and veterinarian communicate with the client. Veterinary technicians' communication significantly enhanced client engagement in decision-making when working collaboratively with the veterinarian.

Establishing the Competency Development and Talent Cultivation Strategies for Physician-Patient Shared Decision-Making Competency Based on the IAA-NRM Approach

Shared decision making (SDM) is a collaborative process involving patients and their healthcare workers negotiating to reach a shared decision about medical care. However, various physician stakeholders (attending physicians, medical residents, and doctors in post-graduate years) may have different viewpoints on SDM processes. The purpose of this study is to explore the core competence of physicians in performing SDM tasks and to investigate the significant competency development aspects/criteria by applying the literature research and expert interviews. We adopt the IAA (importance awareness analysis) technique for different stakeholders to evaluate the status of competency development aspects/criteria and to determine the NRM (network relation map) based on the DEMATEL (decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory) technique. The study combines the IAA and NRM methods and suggests using the IAA-NRM approach to evaluate the adoption strategies and common suitable paths for different levels of physicians. Our findings reveal that SDM perception and practice is the primary influencer of SDM competence development for all stakeholders. The current model can help hospital administrators and directors of medical education understand the diverse stakeholders’ perspectives on the core competence of SDM tasks and determine common development plans. It provides strategic directions for SDM competency development and talent cultivation programs.

Bringing personal perspective elicitation to the heart of shared decision-making: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Proponents of shared decision-making (SDM) advocate the elicitation of the patient's perspective. This scoping review explores if, and to what extent, the personal perspectives of patients are elicited during a clinical encounter, as part of a SDM process. We define personal perspective elicitation (PPE) as: the disclosure (either elicited by the clinician or spontaneously expressed by the patient) of information related to the patient's personal preferences, values and/or context.

METHODS

A search was conducted in five literature databases from inception dates up to July 2020, to identify empirical studies about SDM (with/without SDM instrument).

RESULTS

The search identified 4562 abstracts; 263 articles were read in full text, resulting in 99 included studies. Studies reported low levels of PPE. Integration of personal perspectives into the conversation or a future care plan was largely absent. The majority of the discussed content related to physical health, while social and psychological topics were mostly unaddressed.

CONCLUSIONS

PPE occurs on a very low level in efforts to achieve SDM according to evaluation studies.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

PPE is advocated but rarely achieved in SDM evaluation studies. Causes should be identified, followed by designing interventions to improve this aspect of SDM.

Fuzzy constraint-based agent negotiation framework for doctor-patient shared decision-making

BACKGROUND

The clinical practice of shared decision-making (SDM) has grown in importance. However, most studies on SDM practice concentrated on providing auxiliary knowledge from the third-party standpoint without consideration for the value preferences of doctors and patients. The essences of these methods are complete and manual negotiation, and the problems of high cost, time consumption, delayed response, and decision fatigue are serious.

METHODS

In response to the above limitations, this article proposes a fuzzy constraint-directed agent-based negotiation and recommendation framework for bilateral and multi-issue preference negotiation in SDM (PN-SDM). Its purpose is to provide preference information and intellectualize PN-SDM to promote SDM practice. We modeled PN-SDM problems as distributed fuzzy constraint satisfaction problems and designed the doctor agent and patient agent to negotiate on behalf of the doctor and patient. The negotiation result was then transformed into treatment plans by the recommendation model. The proposed negotiation and recommendation models were introduced in detail by an instance.

RESULTS

The proposed method with different strategies and negotiation pairs achieves good performance in terms of negotiation running time, negotiation rounds, and combined aggregated satisfaction value. Specifically, it can feasibly and effectively complete multiple rounds of PN-SDM in a few seconds and obtain higher satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

The experimental results indicate that the negotiation model can effectively simulate preference negotiation and relieve the pressure of increasing issues. The recommendation model can assist in decision-making and help to realize SDM. In addition, it can flexibly cope with various negotiation scenarios by using different negotiation strategies (e.g., collaborative, win-win, and competitive).

'A basic understanding'; evaluation of a blended training programme for healthcare providers in hospital-based palliative care to improve communication with patients with limited health literacy

BACKGROUND

The non-curative setting makes communication and shared decision-making in palliative care extremely demanding. This is even more so for patients with limited health literacy. So far, research in palliative care focusing on shared decision-making with patients with limited health literacy is lacking. Recent research from our team indicates that the assessment of these patients' understanding of their situation and the implementation of shared decision-making in palliative care, needs improvement.

METHODS

To improve communication and decision-making, especially with patients with limited health literacy, we developed and evaluated a blended training programme for healthcare providers. The training programme comprised of an e-learning and a team training. The evaluation was performed by 1. conducting interviews (n = 15) focused on evaluating the whole programme and, 2. coding video-recorded outpatient consultations on the extent to which providers involved patients in decision-making before (n = 19) and after (n = 20) the intervention, using the 5-item OPTION coding instrument.

RESULTS

The interviews showed that healthcare providers valued the skills they had learned during the e-learning and team training. Providers specifically valued the teach-back technique, learned to use simpler wording and felt better able to recognize patients with limited health literacy. Many providers reported a change in communication behaviour as a consequence of the training programme. Suggestions for improvement for both e-learning and training were, amongst others, a follow-up team training course and a new scenarios for the e-learning about discussing palliative care. For both the pre- and the post-measurement, involving patients in decision-making lies between a minimal and a moderate effort; differences were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The e-learning and team training were valued positively by the healthcare providers. Adaptations to the e-learning have been made after evaluation. The e-learning has been implemented in several hospitals and medical education. To improve shared decision-making in practice a more sustained effort is needed.